Who is going to hell? An argument for the Bible, Religion and God.

[Fruitacious B]

That's Ben Stiller on the left...it has to be.

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

YouTube - Girl tries to convert audience during graduation speech

Looks like someone forgot to take their meds.

[Mr. Blonde]

Yeah, it is...

[BigDongedHoe]

Blonde do you believe in the historical significance of the bible?

[Mr. Blonde]

That's a pretty broad question, and the fact that you're asking it in the way you are immediately makes me think you are sitting on something you recently learned about or remembered that you think can present a decent argument on the premise. Alright, i'll bite.

From what I have researched, it seems that in the many many ancient texts by many authors that were compiled into what is now the Bible, over the course of a couple thousand years, that actual natural disasters, "acts of god" (if you will) that actually happened and are verifiable through studies of geology and archaeology, are referenced in these texts. I don't believe the Bible is a fictional book straight out someones (or many peoples) imagination alone; I believe that things that happened to said individuals were interpreted at the time of writing to be miraculous, when in fact they are not.

In short, I have no doubt the Bible has some basis in factual events; the same way this book (Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter ) probably references actual things that happened in Lincolns lifetime, although obviously vampires don't exist. That's just the first example that comes to mind, and obviously a bit of a joking reference to what you might be inferring, but the point stands; Actual historical events can easily be turned into the equivalent of "tall tales" over hundreds of years of mistranslating, misinterpretation ("literal" vs. "figurative" -- apologists two favorite words) , word of mouth, and storytelling. An actual, devastating flood that wiped out entire regions of livestock and homes can easily turn into a worldwide, life-eradicating flood that lasted 40 days and 40 nights.

That being said, a very intelligent coworker of mine who I discuss religion with from time to time has done much research on the subject (both inside and out of the seminary), and claims he has seen and translated some of these texts himself (copies, i'm sure...), and I can't remember off the top of my head, but he basically says the Messianic prophecies in the Bible have held true to actual historical evidence. This is a subject i've been meaning to research recently, after discussing it with him:



yet haven't got around to quite yet. I've been pretty busy.

So, why do you ask?

[Fruitacious B]

Originally Posted by BigDongedHoe

Blonde do you believe in the historical significance of the bible?

The fact that it is historically significant (yet untrue) is what makes it so bad.

I know you asked Blonde, but that's the right answer.

[BigDongedHoe]

Do you guys believe in the writings of plato, aristotle, or socrates?

And yes Blonde I am sitting on something. Not something that I recently learned but something I've put a lot of thought into. As I continue to grow as a believer I have more things revealed to me to support what I believe.

It's funny you bring up Messianic prophecies. If/when you research this you'll find that the prophecies of the Old Testament to this day are the only ancient writings that have been fulfilled with 100% accuracy to this point. Blonde after you answer the question above answer another for me. If I agree to read any book of your choosing (lets keep it somewhat short say under 200 pages), would you will be willing to read a book of my choosing?

[BigDongedHoe]

Originally Posted by Fruitacious B

The fact that it is historically significant (yet untrue) is what makes it so bad.

Isn't this kind of a contradictory statement?

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by BigDongedHoe

Do you guys believe in the writings of plato, aristotle, or socrates?

There is a huge difference in acknowledging the validity of works/proving certain people existed, and whether or not they were guided by the divine. None of the three great philosophers you just mentioned, at least to my knowledge, ever made any of the unprovable, absolutist claims that the Bible does, and even if they did, none of them have churches. I'm not even going to mention that nobody has gone to wars over any of them.

As I continue to grow as a believer I have more things revealed to me to support what I believe.

Shocking.

It's funny you bring up Messianic prophecies. If/when you research this you'll find that the prophecies of the Old Testament to this day are the only ancient writings that have been fulfilled with 100% accuracy to this point. Blonde after you answer the question above answer another for me. If I agree to read any book of your choosing (lets keep it somewhat short say under 200 pages), would you will be willing to read a book of my choosing?

It's not funny or a coincidence, as it's seems to be one of the only gaps "God" has left to hide in that hasn't been completely disproved by science..yet (therefore a huge refuge and area of study for theists). There could have only been a few things you could have been referencing by your question, so I assumed that's what you were referring to. It still might not be. Either way, I have already admitted my ignorance to the topic of truth of Biblical messianic prophecies (nobody prays to Nostradamus that i'm aware of, FYI) and would certainly be open to question your claim of 100% accuracy -- In fact, even though i'm tired as balls, I think that's how I'll spend the rest of my night.

You don't have to read a book of my choosing (or we could keep it open-ended, as no-worldview shattering book comes to mind under 200 pages..), but I would most certainly be open to reading a suggestion of yours. I've gotten a lot less militant (although still a stout atheist) over the past few months after realizing how little I actually know compared to much more educated men and women on the topic, so i've been reading voraciously on both sides of the argument every chance I get. I'm reading two books on evolution right now (The Greatest Show on Earth-Dawkins, Why Evolution is True-Coyne), and just finished reading The Dawkins Delusion and The Dawkins Confusion (both creative names, by the way) which are critiques of, you guessed it, Richard's book "The God Delusion".

The short book and article, respectively, were good at pointing out some of the absolutism, speculation and general non-science of the book, but I would still recommend The God Delusion for anybody, faithful or otherwise to read (although the former would probably have a lot harder time staying interested). It's a great introduction to atheism and points out many of the logical fallacies religious folk bring out in almost every single discussion on the topic.

So, in short, yes i'll read a book of your suggestion if I can get ahold of it here. Shoot.

[Ugly Bastard]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

no-worldview shattering book comes to mind under 200 pages

Amazon.com: Letter to a Christian Nation (Vintage) (9780307278777): Sam Harris: Books

Comes in at 144 pages and is really good.

[Mr. Blonde]

There you go. I'll read your recommendation if you read that. I haven't yet (but I've wanted to; I've already referenced Sam Harris), and I trust UB's recommendation. I heavily annotate all non-fiction I read, i'll post the major points I want to discuss afterwards, if you do likewise. Deal?

EDIT: shit, at around 10 bucks with shipping, i'll even buy it for you.

[Dent]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

EDIT: shit, at around 10 bucks with shipping, i'll even buy it for you.

Just don't expect it this year

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[BigDongedHoe]

What I was saying about Messianic prophecies is that there isn't one prophecy that has yet to not come true. There are many that have been left unturned (such as the end of the world and pretty much the entire book of Revelations). The point is that there is yet to be an OT prophecy that was made that didn't come true. The only ancient writings to this date that can say this.

What I was hinting at is that people will acknowledge the significance of plato, aristotle, and socrates writing. Historically these guys are held in great esteem. However prophets who wrote about Jesus of Nazareth aren't given the same respect. Lets think about the 4 gospels for a second (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John). They were written some 400 years after plato, aristotle, and socrates walked the earth. Yet people want to historically discount the bible. If you give them a high historical credit you should be giving the bible that same credibility.

If this were the case who is Jesus of Nazareth? Is he a liar to you? Is he absolutely crazy for claiming to be Son of God? My faith is based around the fact that I believe Jesus is who he said he was.

As far as the book suggestion:

Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: More Than a Carpenter

I believe this might tickle your intellect a bit and get you thinking. Realizing my faith isn't based off simply emotion.

I'll make sure to buy the book you suggested and read it. I'll post my thoughts here afterwards.

[Ugly Bastard]

Originally Posted by Dent

Just don't expect it this year

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

LOLOL!!! Well fucking played!

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by BigDongedHoe

If you give them a high historical credit you should be giving the bible that same credibility.

I'm still failing to draw a parallel between 3 philosophers who had some great ideas and a wandering desert teacher who claims he was the son of an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent god. I'm not saying there is no good moral or thought-provoking dialogue in the Bible, and that it should be banished forever and we should burn it. I believe, just like Greek mythology, it's a valuable literary source and an important part of developing human culture. I don't, however, believe that it should be seen as anything more than that (Just like Greek mythology) and the burden of extraordinary evidence, as Dent mentioned, lies on believers, not on nonbelievers.

This seems to be your logic: Because the Bible referenced real parts of history, provable by science, everything else in it (not provable by science) must also be true.

I would like some examples of the prophecies you are touting, all i've been able to find are Bible-purported and Bible affirmed ones. (Ex: The Messiah would be a descendant of Boaz & Ruth. Ruth 4:12-17; Luke 3:32)


EDIT: A point I brought up when I first discussed these prophecies with my coworker, was this: "How can we know that the original "prophecies" (assuming their fulfillment came before Gutenberg in the 15th century) were not back-edited to fit actual historical events?"

[BigDongedHoe]

Those questions will all be answered by that book.

I found this table stating some of the OT prophecies that are answered in the new testament:

Messianic Prophecies

I obviously don't have time to go through and read every piece of scripture in there but my guess is its accurate since scripture is listed directly.

My logic is more along the lines of this. Abraham Lincoln was assasinated by John Wilkes Booth, was I there to see it? No. Do I believe it to be true? Yes because there are numerous first hand writings to support that claim.

When Jesus walked the earth he preformed miracles in front of many who still would not call him the son of God. Was I there to see it? No. Do I believe it to be true? Yes because there are first hand writings of those who saw it. This book will explain why the gospels were chosen above other writings during that time and also explain why they are historically credible.

At that point you can make up your mind about Jesus. Liar, Lunatic, or Lord?

[Mr. Blonde]

I will definitely read the book.

But your logic fails when it brings in the supernatural.

I could assassinate somebody right now. No problem. Completely feasible.

Nobody can turn water into wine. Nobody comes back from the dead. Nobody heals the blind with their saliva.

[BigDongedHoe]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Nobody can turn water into wine. Nobody comes back from the dead. Nobody heals the blind with their saliva.

Nobody except the son of God

I know thats not the explanation you're looking for but there were multiple historical accounts of Christ doing this.

Let me ask you this if you saw with your own eyes a man turn water into wine. When he said he was the son of God would you believe him? Many in that day saw the miracles Christ preformed and thought he was demon possessed, they saw yet still did not believe. When Christ died on Cross at Calvary for our sins was he just a crazy man who did it for attention or is it feasible he was a living savior born a man on earth who was sent to die for the sins of all?

[Ugly Bastard]

I believe Jesus was probably a fantastic illusionist. The David Blaine of his day, if you will. And in "his day", people were way more gullible, naive, and had far less information at their fingertips, so it was easy for them to cling to Jesus and begin worshipping him, which, if I had to guess, probably suited Jesus just fine since he was likely a huge narcissist.

[BigDongedHoe]

So making a blind man see or raising Lazarus from the dead was David Blaine magic? I'd like to see David Blaine make a blind man see, walk on water, or raise somebody from the dead.

Jesus was so narcissistic he lived a flawless life in service of others. The fact that Jesus' whole life was based on being selfless would be contradictory to him being a narcissist wouldn't it?

Very possible but less probable.

[Ugly Bastard]

Magicians use assistants all the time. And servitude of others is the weathervane for narcissism.

[BigDongedHoe]

OT prophecies written hundreds of years before Jesus' life said the messiah would return in the form of a man being the Son of God who would be crucified on the cross and be risen from the dead. I can provide the scripture references to confirm those claims. All of these prophecies were written before the life of Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus fulfilled every one of those prophecies that were written and lived a sinless perfect life in servitude to others.

Despite all of this you still believe it's more likely that Jesus was a narcissistic magician?

[Beebs]

Originally Posted by Fruitacious B

The fact that it is historically significant (yet untrue) is what makes it so bad.

I know you asked Blonde, but that's the right answer.

Well as an account of the early history of the jewish people, and as a result their neighbors, it is extremely useful. Obviously you have to understand that things like the Red Sea splittling are untrue (likely a retelling of moses timing the tide at a narrow crossing), but it is much more complete than similar texts from around the same time.

[Beebs]

Originally Posted by Ugly Bastard

I believe Jesus was probably a fantastic illusionist. The David Blaine of his day, if you will. And in "his day", people were way more gullible, naive, and had far less information at their fingertips, so it was easy for them to cling to Jesus and begin worshipping him, which, if I had to guess, probably suited Jesus just fine since he was likely a huge narcissist.

I don't really think that is all that accurate. Most of what was written about jesus was after he was dead; it would make much more sense that the people writing the stories simply add in bits of magic to make a relatively boring event worth reading.

To me it just seems more likely, although infinitely less awesome, that Jesus was not a practitioner of close-up magic.

[ninjaface]

I'd say magician, or he didn't exist.
As fun as it is to play the Jesus Game, I have to paraphrase what I've said before.

Jesus shares many major characteristics with deities from other religions. Such as
Horus the Sun God of Egypt, Attis of Phyrigia, Krishna of India, Dionysus of Greece, and Mithra of Persia and several others.

Most of those religions had written accounts of their Jesus, too. Remember what you said about wanting the Bible to have historical credibility? You'll have to extend the same courtesy to these other religions. Shouldn't be hard. Just start with all the Jesus-like characters and you should be believing in no time!

And I read some reviews for the book you suggested. One of the 1 star reviews from a Christian said:
"More Than a Carpenter" is just too oversimplistic to convince intelligent skeptics and be of value to Christians with a good grasp of Scripture, history, and theology.

[BigDongedHoe]

1 review of hundreds that you picked out to fit your agenda.

I'll admit I'm not familiar with these other people you mention but at this point I don't really need to be. My personal testimony and personal relationship with Christ is enough for me. If you really studied it at the very least I think you'd realize that Jesus did exsist. There are simply too many historical writings wrote about him including ones that weren't included in the bible. I can't tell you one person who has had there life here changed by Horus the Sun God of Egypt but I can tell you thousands I've heard had there life changed by Christ. I know you can make a cultural argument but truth be told people are converting to Christ worldwide .

Bottom line is that I tried to get people at least thinking. Also give some reasoning for me of why I believe in Jesus Christ not just from an "irrational emotional" perspective.